NOVAK Djokovic has identified a rational basis for different competitions to offer different amounts of prize money, namely if they generate different amounts of revenue. But this may fly in the face of the social imperative for men’s and women’s competitions to offer equal prizes.

Male players have so far failed to recognise a simple change which could help to resolve this difference of perspectives more favourably for them. It would be to abolish men’s tennis. The word “men’s” in the title of a tennis event serves no purpose other than to maintain the illusion of gender symmetry in the sport, which is not in their interest.

Alongside the completely open competitions which would result from this, women would still be at liberty to play in their own restricted entry events. But it could hardly be seen as oppressive for a competition which excludes half the world’s population to be less generously rewarded than one which does not.

From: Andrew Mercer, Guiseley.

SURELY, in the age of equality in sport, women’s tennis matches should be decided by the best of five sets in Grand Slam tournaments rather than three?